http://crowdtamers.com/about/about-trevor/marketing-maestro-for-hire has been mentioned a couple times already, but a quote from it:

Not quite yet, he's leaving in August 2014.

Will miss the fun and laughter you bring TeT.

I also had nothing against regional pricing but truth to be told GOG never was open about what would we get in exchange for it. If they would have told: we could bring such games and get those publishers on board - and the only problem is regional pricing - community would swallow this somehow. Possibly they just couldn't do this but ...

I was never concerned about regional pricing.

If you did not notice regional pricing is here. The only thing is that gog decided to compensate afflicted buyers who have to pay a lot more for a game. Regional pricing did not help at all to get games here or at least not yet. Read the Getting back to our roots post.

Well what we have here is regional pricing for what, two titles?
Definitely different than what they were thinking of implementing at first.

Not that I'm saying that it is a bad or a good thing.

Well the only thing they did not implement is regional pricing for the old games as they wanted to do. Thats really the only difference in comparison to what they wanted to do before the outrage began. So it does not seem that regional pricing brought more games here.

This is worse news than yesterday's announcement of Bohemia pulling out of gog.

The other difference is that because they will compensate for the games that are regionally priced and because GOG does not have infinite amounts of money there will be very few games regionally priced.

But we can't deduce from it that having regional pricing was not enough to entice publishers to give us bigger games, has you have done, because the equation is very different as it also needs to make financial sense to GOG as they would have a much smaller margin (if not a negative one).

With regional pricing as was proposed (and rejected) GOG only needed to convince publishers to sell at the same price as other stores but without DRM.

With regional pricing as is used GOG not only needs to convince publishers to sell games at the same price as other stores without DRM but it also needs to convince itself that selling that game will not cost it money.

So trying to draw conclusion about the proposed regional pricing scheme from the performance of the current regional pricing scheme is a fool's errand.

Look nobody expects that gog will be able to hold on their compensation promises for long. They will go for full regional pricing at the end - they will just have to. That is obvious. I think most of us at the end would have accepted full regional pricing as an evil that was needed to get more games if there was not the whole botched pr stunt showing this as a good news. There will be another outrage then when they disclose that they will go for full regional pricing and that will happen mark my words.

Had to reply to his comment, as as this attitude is just too infuriating to ignore. There's tons of great new games on this site and I wouldn't be happy at all if gog were to leave all of those to their competitors in Seattle. I'm always happy to see a classic that I have fond memories of being released here. But I do not at all agree with the hostility towards the release of new games. It seems to me that some users think that releasing new(ish) games on this site will either come at the expense of old classics being released (which I neither think nor hope is the case) or that the mere presence of these new games somehow besmirch the glory of the old titles (which is, quite frankly, crossing the line into outright idiotic zealotism).

I'm not hostile towards any games on GOG. I just wish I could filter and select better. I'm a bit bored of finding the zillionth original puzzle-adventure-platformer when searching for new releases. So I would appreciate better service functions of the website i.e. filters. But apart from this I wish GOG as many good games as possible.

No, they don't have to. They can also choose not to get big new games that are sold at retail until retail is a small enough share of any given game's sales that they cannot dictate that kind of terms.

Personally, while I don't like regional pricing, I think that on a strategic level it was a good thing because it is much easier for an overpriced game to come down in price (sale, passage of time) than for a DRM'd game to lose DRM as it requires work to actually remove it.

This can be seen with the frequency that expensive games go on sale or drop in price vs the frequency that DRM games lose it.

As a result I am much more confident in my future ability to get a DRM free expensive game at a reasonable price than I am in my future ability to get a reasonably priced game (currently with DRM) DRM free.

On this I agree with all my heart + coming soon list please.